Changes to FA QO Compensation
Posted: Sat Sep 30, 2023 2:11 pm
Mike - Borealis
10:41 AM
There has been some discussion - really for a couple of seasons regarding the FA compensation issue as it relates to Qualifying Offers…
Matt - Shisa
10:42 AM
Oh no, not when I finally have one =P
2
Mike - Borealis
10:42 AM
Currently. if you have an eligible FA, you can make a Qualifying Offer (~$15M) and if they decline and sign elsewhere, you get a pick in the Supplemental round, after the 1st round…
10:44
The question of… equity(?) comes up - who really benefits (I suppose), and should we move the compensation back a round or two (to the 2nd or 3rd) - or perhaps get rid of it all together?
10:44
@Matt - Shisa
I’m only the messenger…
1
Greg - Alleghenies
10:45 AM
i say keep it as is
2
Lenny- Bears
10:45 AM
I agree with Greg.
2
Dan - Ghosts
10:45 AM
Eliminate it all together
Sean - Kentucky
10:45 AM
I am fine with it
1
Yuma
10:45 AM
I say do away with it.
Dan - Ghosts
10:45 AM
Free market!
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:46 AM
The players who reject the QO definitely aren't benefitting
1
Michael - Hitmen
10:46 AM
Keep as is!
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:46 AM
bc they get signed in June
1
Kevin - Evas
10:46 AM
I say eliminate it all together.
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:47 AM
i think if we keep it, we should raise the salary of the QO
Evan - Underground
10:47 AM
It does have the effect of suppressing the already usually pretty weak FA classes
1
Tim - Warriors
10:47 AM
I also agree with Greg. Keep it as is … Or perhaps raise the dollar amount (for next season and beyond).
Greg - Alleghenies
10:47 AM
I am for raising the dollar amount
James - Calzones
10:47 AM
I also say do away with it.
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:47 AM
salaries in the league are already pretty depressed
Kevin - Evas
10:48 AM
Except for Burroughs
3
1
Sean - Kentucky
10:48 AM
Raising it would be good
Chuck - Trendsetters
10:48 AM
Okay. I'm in.
Matt - Shisa
10:48 AM
How about in future years its a supp pick after the 2nd round?
Patrick - Havana
10:49 AM
I like it as is but would favor moving the supplemental round after round 2; I agree with raising the qualifying offer amount
Yuma
10:49 AM
Or after the 5th round.
3
RJ - Sandgnats
10:49 AM
I think it benefits the mid market teams the most and should be kept
1
Evan - Underground
10:49 AM
Raising seems a decent compromise
Yuma
10:49 AM
But it hurts those of us at the bottom of the league.
Michael - Hitmen
10:50 AM
Put it to an official vote?
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:50 AM
there's way too much good financial management in this league. we need a few wahoos going $60m over budget and having to re-calibrate on the fly to keep things interesting
1 reply
Today at 10:51 AMView thread
Mike - Borealis
10:50 AM
Hey Chuck!
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:50 AM
I want to do the math for us, but the league that shall not be named uses the average salary of the top 125 players in the league for the QO amount
Chuck - Trendsetters
10:50 AM
Hola!
Yuma
10:51 AM
the League that shall not be named has always been bad news. Let’s not imitate them.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:51 AM
replied to a thread:
there's way too much good financial management in this league. we need a few wahoos going $60m over budget and having to re-calibrate on the fly to keep things interesting
Both sides sides of that statement are completely wrong
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:51 AM
ah, if we can't change the QO amount, i'd in favor of getting rid of it
Chuck - Trendsetters
10:52 AM
I say leave it. Otherwise you have a rich get richer and poor get poorer situation.
Jaime - Kalamazoo
10:52 AM
Morning gentlemen. Better late than never
3
Yuma
10:53 AM
@Chuck - Trendsetters
What we have now is rich getting richer and poor stuck at the bottom.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:53 AM
The problem has been, the system is designed to help smaller teams who can't afford to keep star players get compensation when they leave. But historically, it has been a bigger benefit to big teams who are able to replace good players with good prospects. (edited)
Chuck - Trendsetters
10:54 AM
Good point.
Yuma
10:54 AM
Exactly. Yuma has never benefitted from it.
Kevin - Evas
10:54 AM
Small teams losing players to free agency is not a big problem. Most players are either extended, or traded.
I agree that the biggest beneficiaries are the big market teams. I've benefited myself.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:55 AM
My preferred options would be to move the comp pick back to the end of the 2nd or 3rd round OR axe the system
10:55
Exactly Kevin
Andy - Fishermen
10:55 AM
I will vote for the picks to go to the later rounds OR axe
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:55 AM
If small teams aren't benefitting, it's not serving it's purpose
3
James - Calzones
10:55 AM
If we can't axe it, move it far enough down the draft order to benefit the teams that are struggling/rebuilding.
Mike - Borealis
10:55 AM
In fairness, I have had a few top players come from the Supp round…
RJ - Sandgnats
10:56 AM
It’s really the mid market teams below the big boys that need this help with QOs.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:57 AM
@Mike - Borealis
And without the system, those players could've been in Yuma, SA, NO, etc
Ron - Akira
10:57 AM
Lower the comp rd or get rid of it
Mike - Borealis
10:57 AM
That is true…
Michael - Hitmen
10:57 AM
With the way some people draft.. there is no guarantee of that Dylan
Jaime - Kalamazoo
10:58 AM
I like the idea of moving the QO amount up AND moving it back a round or two.
Sean - Kentucky
10:58 AM
I have had a couple of picks but I screwed them up :)
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:58 AM
To note, we won't be making a decision here today. We'll open a thread on the forums to discuss and any change would happen next offseason
4
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:58 AM
is the supp round moveable in-game?
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:58 AM
It's easy to manually do
1
10:58
Which we already do
1
10:59
The in-game setting for what we want, wouldn't work
10:59
It changes the Comp pick round to be dependent on the salary of the player signed.
10:59
With 0 clarity to what those numbers are (edited)
Chuck - Trendsetters
11:00 AM
Would that system work, the in game system? It seems the more you pay (higher market teams) the higher the comp pick?
Mike - Borealis
11:00 AM
I would be against a system that was a mystery…
Yuma
11:01 AM
Amen.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:01 AM
Yea, the system is to unknown with 0 detail in how it actually works
11:01
It's so much easier to do it manually
Chuck - Trendsetters
11:01 AM
Okay.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:01 AM
Like adding an extra line to a spreadsheet easy
Yuma
11:01 AM
Even easier to get rid of it altogether.
Mike - Borealis
11:02 AM
I am hearing that there is a general thought that bumping the offer and moving back to the end of R2 might be a plan - question: If we are not getting a R1 Supp pick, would we then not lose a R1 pick for signing? Instead the R2 pick is lost?
Michael - Hitmen
11:03 AM
Good question
Brian - Tempe Apollos
11:03 AM
the lost pick is the worst part of the system, afaic
3
11:03
it discourages almost the entire league from signing these guys and kills their FA value
11:04
even if your 1st is protected you just lose one later
Yuma
11:04 AM
So let’s lose the whole system!
Andy - Fishermen
11:05 AM
Yes, I agree the lost pick is the issue there.
RJ - Sandgnats
11:05 AM
Has anyone like
@Frank - Amsterdam Lions
looked at the data?
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:06 AM
I know the vast majority of comp picks have been from playoff teams
11:06
And very few below that
11:06
And hesitation to sign comp FA's is very much a thing
Kevin - Evas
11:06 AM
Not to mention we can game the system by trading away picks
2
Mike - Borealis
11:07 AM
Truth!
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:07 AM
Comp eligible players are arguably more likely to end up signing for a top team who is more willing to lose a 1st round pick
Matt - Shisa
11:07 AM
*5th round pick
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:07 AM
No FA signings on day 1 by the way
4
Mike - Borealis
11:08 AM
Four of the 7 potential picks this year are playoff teams - and one was close…
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:09 AM
I'm leaning towards wanting to just axe the system altogether. Draft pick trading just makes it so abusable
Yuma
11:10 AM
Yes!
Mike - Borealis
11:10 AM
Let’s continue this excellent discussion in the Forum - we’ll create a new thread and add to it this part of the WM discussion - and I encourage everyone to add their ideas; I feel like we are formulating a potential change here…
New
Evan - Underground
11:11 AM
Burroughs is a great example of what the current QO situation can cause too, most of the other strong bat options are QO guys (they're mostly old too but that's less of a problem to teams probably)
Sean - Claymores
11:21 AM
Two more quick thoughts on qualifying offers, aren’t certain teams protected from losing their first draft pick currently? Also, if small market teams believe they’ll have a shot at a guy without the QO…this is just not gonna happen. I’d argue they have a better shot now, because the demand for those players will increase if your remove the comp tag.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:21 AM
Top 11 picks are always protected UNLESS they are traded away
10:41 AM
There has been some discussion - really for a couple of seasons regarding the FA compensation issue as it relates to Qualifying Offers…
Matt - Shisa
10:42 AM
Oh no, not when I finally have one =P
2
Mike - Borealis
10:42 AM
Currently. if you have an eligible FA, you can make a Qualifying Offer (~$15M) and if they decline and sign elsewhere, you get a pick in the Supplemental round, after the 1st round…
10:44
The question of… equity(?) comes up - who really benefits (I suppose), and should we move the compensation back a round or two (to the 2nd or 3rd) - or perhaps get rid of it all together?
10:44
@Matt - Shisa
I’m only the messenger…
1
Greg - Alleghenies
10:45 AM
i say keep it as is
2
Lenny- Bears
10:45 AM
I agree with Greg.
2
Dan - Ghosts
10:45 AM
Eliminate it all together
Sean - Kentucky
10:45 AM
I am fine with it
1
Yuma
10:45 AM
I say do away with it.
Dan - Ghosts
10:45 AM
Free market!
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:46 AM
The players who reject the QO definitely aren't benefitting
1
Michael - Hitmen
10:46 AM
Keep as is!
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:46 AM
bc they get signed in June
1
Kevin - Evas
10:46 AM
I say eliminate it all together.
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:47 AM
i think if we keep it, we should raise the salary of the QO
Evan - Underground
10:47 AM
It does have the effect of suppressing the already usually pretty weak FA classes
1
Tim - Warriors
10:47 AM
I also agree with Greg. Keep it as is … Or perhaps raise the dollar amount (for next season and beyond).
Greg - Alleghenies
10:47 AM
I am for raising the dollar amount
James - Calzones
10:47 AM
I also say do away with it.
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:47 AM
salaries in the league are already pretty depressed
Kevin - Evas
10:48 AM
Except for Burroughs
3
1
Sean - Kentucky
10:48 AM
Raising it would be good
Chuck - Trendsetters
10:48 AM
Okay. I'm in.
Matt - Shisa
10:48 AM
How about in future years its a supp pick after the 2nd round?
Patrick - Havana
10:49 AM
I like it as is but would favor moving the supplemental round after round 2; I agree with raising the qualifying offer amount
Yuma
10:49 AM
Or after the 5th round.
3
RJ - Sandgnats
10:49 AM
I think it benefits the mid market teams the most and should be kept
1
Evan - Underground
10:49 AM
Raising seems a decent compromise
Yuma
10:49 AM
But it hurts those of us at the bottom of the league.
Michael - Hitmen
10:50 AM
Put it to an official vote?
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:50 AM
there's way too much good financial management in this league. we need a few wahoos going $60m over budget and having to re-calibrate on the fly to keep things interesting
1 reply
Today at 10:51 AMView thread
Mike - Borealis
10:50 AM
Hey Chuck!
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:50 AM
I want to do the math for us, but the league that shall not be named uses the average salary of the top 125 players in the league for the QO amount
Chuck - Trendsetters
10:50 AM
Hola!
Yuma
10:51 AM
the League that shall not be named has always been bad news. Let’s not imitate them.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:51 AM
replied to a thread:
there's way too much good financial management in this league. we need a few wahoos going $60m over budget and having to re-calibrate on the fly to keep things interesting
Both sides sides of that statement are completely wrong
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:51 AM
ah, if we can't change the QO amount, i'd in favor of getting rid of it
Chuck - Trendsetters
10:52 AM
I say leave it. Otherwise you have a rich get richer and poor get poorer situation.
Jaime - Kalamazoo
10:52 AM
Morning gentlemen. Better late than never
3
Yuma
10:53 AM
@Chuck - Trendsetters
What we have now is rich getting richer and poor stuck at the bottom.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:53 AM
The problem has been, the system is designed to help smaller teams who can't afford to keep star players get compensation when they leave. But historically, it has been a bigger benefit to big teams who are able to replace good players with good prospects. (edited)
Chuck - Trendsetters
10:54 AM
Good point.
Yuma
10:54 AM
Exactly. Yuma has never benefitted from it.
Kevin - Evas
10:54 AM
Small teams losing players to free agency is not a big problem. Most players are either extended, or traded.
I agree that the biggest beneficiaries are the big market teams. I've benefited myself.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:55 AM
My preferred options would be to move the comp pick back to the end of the 2nd or 3rd round OR axe the system
10:55
Exactly Kevin
Andy - Fishermen
10:55 AM
I will vote for the picks to go to the later rounds OR axe
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:55 AM
If small teams aren't benefitting, it's not serving it's purpose
3
James - Calzones
10:55 AM
If we can't axe it, move it far enough down the draft order to benefit the teams that are struggling/rebuilding.
Mike - Borealis
10:55 AM
In fairness, I have had a few top players come from the Supp round…
RJ - Sandgnats
10:56 AM
It’s really the mid market teams below the big boys that need this help with QOs.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:57 AM
@Mike - Borealis
And without the system, those players could've been in Yuma, SA, NO, etc
Ron - Akira
10:57 AM
Lower the comp rd or get rid of it
Mike - Borealis
10:57 AM
That is true…
Michael - Hitmen
10:57 AM
With the way some people draft.. there is no guarantee of that Dylan
Jaime - Kalamazoo
10:58 AM
I like the idea of moving the QO amount up AND moving it back a round or two.
Sean - Kentucky
10:58 AM
I have had a couple of picks but I screwed them up :)
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:58 AM
To note, we won't be making a decision here today. We'll open a thread on the forums to discuss and any change would happen next offseason
4
Brian - Tempe Apollos
10:58 AM
is the supp round moveable in-game?
Dylan - Wind Dancers
10:58 AM
It's easy to manually do
1
10:58
Which we already do
1
10:59
The in-game setting for what we want, wouldn't work
10:59
It changes the Comp pick round to be dependent on the salary of the player signed.
10:59
With 0 clarity to what those numbers are (edited)
Chuck - Trendsetters
11:00 AM
Would that system work, the in game system? It seems the more you pay (higher market teams) the higher the comp pick?
Mike - Borealis
11:00 AM
I would be against a system that was a mystery…
Yuma
11:01 AM
Amen.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:01 AM
Yea, the system is to unknown with 0 detail in how it actually works
11:01
It's so much easier to do it manually
Chuck - Trendsetters
11:01 AM
Okay.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:01 AM
Like adding an extra line to a spreadsheet easy
Yuma
11:01 AM
Even easier to get rid of it altogether.
Mike - Borealis
11:02 AM
I am hearing that there is a general thought that bumping the offer and moving back to the end of R2 might be a plan - question: If we are not getting a R1 Supp pick, would we then not lose a R1 pick for signing? Instead the R2 pick is lost?
Michael - Hitmen
11:03 AM
Good question
Brian - Tempe Apollos
11:03 AM
the lost pick is the worst part of the system, afaic
3
11:03
it discourages almost the entire league from signing these guys and kills their FA value
11:04
even if your 1st is protected you just lose one later
Yuma
11:04 AM
So let’s lose the whole system!
Andy - Fishermen
11:05 AM
Yes, I agree the lost pick is the issue there.
RJ - Sandgnats
11:05 AM
Has anyone like
@Frank - Amsterdam Lions
looked at the data?
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:06 AM
I know the vast majority of comp picks have been from playoff teams
11:06
And very few below that
11:06
And hesitation to sign comp FA's is very much a thing
Kevin - Evas
11:06 AM
Not to mention we can game the system by trading away picks
2
Mike - Borealis
11:07 AM
Truth!
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:07 AM
Comp eligible players are arguably more likely to end up signing for a top team who is more willing to lose a 1st round pick
Matt - Shisa
11:07 AM
*5th round pick
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:07 AM
No FA signings on day 1 by the way
4
Mike - Borealis
11:08 AM
Four of the 7 potential picks this year are playoff teams - and one was close…
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:09 AM
I'm leaning towards wanting to just axe the system altogether. Draft pick trading just makes it so abusable
Yuma
11:10 AM
Yes!
Mike - Borealis
11:10 AM
Let’s continue this excellent discussion in the Forum - we’ll create a new thread and add to it this part of the WM discussion - and I encourage everyone to add their ideas; I feel like we are formulating a potential change here…
New
Evan - Underground
11:11 AM
Burroughs is a great example of what the current QO situation can cause too, most of the other strong bat options are QO guys (they're mostly old too but that's less of a problem to teams probably)
Sean - Claymores
11:21 AM
Two more quick thoughts on qualifying offers, aren’t certain teams protected from losing their first draft pick currently? Also, if small market teams believe they’ll have a shot at a guy without the QO…this is just not gonna happen. I’d argue they have a better shot now, because the demand for those players will increase if your remove the comp tag.
Dylan - Wind Dancers
11:21 AM
Top 11 picks are always protected UNLESS they are traded away